First, its not a manifesto. Thats a word subversive homos use. I take it you're not a subversive homo, so don't. The way the u.s. and western allies operate is almost to a letter how the cartels operate. Once you observe the entire beast for what it is, you stop denouncing their methods, and only denounce their goals. There is a situation where on the one hand the media doesn't actually need views for revenue, and on the otherhand the basis of their funding relies on how much influence they wield over the public. If their propaganda fails, the regime pivots to cutting funding and giving it to others, like social media. And so we get these arguments about whether its really about views or if views are completely irrelevant, and actually the answer is that its both. The media can't afford to ignore stories that can't be ignored, and *can* afford to ignore stories it *must* ignore. This seems like a no-brainer, or a tautology, but it highlights a key difference between the stories that get covered and the stories that don't: In order to *control* a developing narrative, either one they created or one that emerged naturally, they *must* cover it. Thats why they cover the party infighting. Of course the parties know this, and early on as the modern conventions reformed themselves into what they are today, they would have exploited this to boost visibility. The same is true for outsider parties. A false dialectic, so designed, fights itself because the drama creates legitimacy, psychological distance between two fronts of the same party, and largely avoids the issue of having to fight much more powerful parties, while appearing weak and harmless. And for the networks again, they want to shape and control outcomes, and its free entertainment for their viewers. Thats the basis of the antifa-proudboys/alt-right fights going on in the street, a new radicalism, and its almost entirely promoted from within by the u.s. government. Congressmen or senators might have some hands in it sure, because thats inevitable, but what I think is happening, is some major institutions, maybe the intelligence agencies and the DoD, are co-opted by foreign powers, sold us out, and want to create a powder keg environment to replace congress and the senate. Imagine not just a manchurian candidate, but a manchurian *government*. The u.s. as a vassal state. Think back to rome (thats an overdone meme, I know, but think back to it), and consider: The goths took over one half after sacking it, and started the balkanization process, that lead to the dark ages, that lead to the system of fiefdom and vassalage. Meanwhile the other half of rome (the byzantines) kept on existing for a thousand year. Now think about that. The DoD predicts civil war, while experts actually worth their salt, say 'no'. Meanwhile other experts say "not a civil war but balkanization". And we have the demographics for that splintering. Half the world still relies on the u.s. fiat dollar system, so if this was an organized tear down over the last 50 years, and theres no reason to assume it wasn't, then the u.s. dollar and its backers can't simply vanish. The thinking then is that the u.s. splits in half, one half distingegrates into a "civil war", into individual blocs or mixture of individual states and blocs, almost a replay of the sovietization-and-then-breakup. And the other half continues on, a vassalge, which mostly continues to exist as a threat to **control** the rate of the failure of the dollar. This large segment maybe goes catholic, but more likely the balkanized states do, while some other denomination dominates the large bloc half of the remaining u.s. If the intent is to have a tighter tie and vassalage to china, and control the descent of the USD while other currencies and nations peak, then the logical conclusion is that the western half of the u.s. will become the next byzantium, while the eastern half, and the ozarks become the equivalent of afghanistan. This arrangement also makes sense if you want to formally unseat DC, even as it assists in its own destruction. Move the capitol, and it has non of the defenses, or infrastructure necessary for government without massive investment. The old DC then becomes the "religious" center of power, with the new 'religion' being "patriotism" or "americanism" and we burn ourselves out in a two front war: one against the occupied west, and one internally against "terrorists" (actual americans and patriots). And the old DC will be allowed to continue in its withered, neutered state, because despite its appeals to "taking back america" and red-dawn style manifest destiny, its function will be to burn out whatever remains of any resistance to the occupation in the west of the CONUS, thereby preventing the scattered eastern states and blocs from coalescing into a credible threat. If an alternative to the slow-change-to-totalitarianism is desired, this is how I would do a take over of the u.s. if a takeover is in the cards. I see no reason why this isn't their plan to begin with.